Senate passes change to bill publication

Jan. 29, 2013

Written by

Scott Bauer

Associated Press

La Follette

More

ADVERTISEMENT

MADISON — The Wisconsin state Senate passed a proposal Tuesday to take away the power of the secretary of state to delay publishing bills passed by the Legislature, a move Democrats decried as retaliation for the current office holder’s opposition to Gov. Scott Walker’s collective bargaining law.

The proposal, which passed on a party line vote in the Republican-controlled Senate, is the second bill introduced this session and the first to be voted on. It comes after Democratic Secretary of State La Follette angered Republicans in 2011 by delaying publication of a bill that effectively ended collective bargaining for public workers and required them to pay more for health insurance and pensions.

“It’s ridiculous,” La Follette said of the bill and how quickly Republicans were moving it. “Like a lot of things they’ve been doing, it’s being rushed through, which is a real affront to our democracy.”

New laws must be published before they can take effect, and the secretary of state now controls that process. He can wait up to 10 days after a governor has signed a bill to tell the Legislative Reference Bureau to publish it and setting a date for it to appear in the official state newspaper, the Wisconsin State Journal.

The proposal would remove the secretary of state from the process and require the Legislative Reference Bureau to publish bills the day after they are signed by the governor, unless another date is specified.

The bill “will gut the opportunity of the secretary of state’s participation in the legislative process,” said Sen. Fred Risser, D-Madison. “It’s a bill aimed at the one Democrat left in state public office. So much for bipartisanship.”

Republicans said the bill wasn’t about payback, but about making sure no secretary of state has the ability to block the will of the Legislature by delaying the enactment of a new law.

“We’re not trying to pull a fast one,” Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said. “We’re not trying to take any power away from Doug La Follette.”

(Page 2 of 2)

La Follette said in 2011 that he planned to wait the full 10 days before publishing the collective bargaining bill pushed by Walker and other Republicans.

Before the 10 days was up, Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued an order blocking La Follette from publishing the bill because she thought the open meetings law had been violated in the process of passing the measure. Republicans ordered the Legislative Reference Bureau to publish the bill anyway on its website, bypassing La Follette.

In June 2011, after the state Supreme Court upheld the law, La Follette again waited the full 10 days before publishing it, saying he wanted to afford as much time as possible for the public to understand the law.

He ran last year in a Democratic primary to take on Walker in a recall election but came in fourth. Walker easily defeated the primary’s winner, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

The measure that passed 17-14 Tuesday is the latest in a series of steps taken by the Legislature and governors over the years to remove duties like overseeing elections and maintaining notaries public from the secretary of state’s office. Currently, La Follette’s office’s limited responsibilities include publishing bills and keeping the official state seal.

La Follette, who has been secretary of state all but four years since 1975, said the publication of bills was never an issue until 2011.

“It’s a solution seeking a problem that doesn’t exist,” he said of the proposal sponsored by Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend.

That bill passed the Senate last year but died in the Assembly. It must clear both and be signed by Walker before it would take effect.

A spokeswoman for Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said he supports it and looks forward to quickly passing it. Walker has yet to take a position on the proposal.

La Follette isn’t optimistic he’ll be able to stop the bill.

“I can’t do a whole lot,” he said. “I can do what I’ve already done. I’ve explained to them why this is a bad and unnecessary idea.”